Julio Biason
5 years ago
2 changed files with 78 additions and 0 deletions
@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ |
|||||||
|
+++ |
||||||
|
title = "88 Days to Any Goal - Rolland Roberts" |
||||||
|
date = 2020-02-20 |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
[taxonomies] |
||||||
|
tags = ["books", "reviews", "self-help", "rolland roberts"] |
||||||
|
+++ |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
[GoodReads Summary](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40597273-the-90-day-promise): |
||||||
|
No summary. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
<!-- more --> |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
{{ stars(stars=1) }} |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A whole "book" for something that is 5 (badly explained) bullet points. And a |
||||||
|
lot of "THIS THING IS GREAT!" |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Want to lose weight? If you do the 88 day promise, you'll become weightless! |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Want to make more money? With the 88 day promise, you'll be richer than Jeff |
||||||
|
Bezos! |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I did the 88 day promise for my campaign and almost got elected as king of the |
||||||
|
world. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Want to get impervious to bullets? All you need is the 88 day promise! |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A young Kal-El once decided to become stronger and, in 88 days, he was |
||||||
|
Superman! |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Jokes apart, there is very little information about what the heck the 88 day |
||||||
|
promise is. Just focusing on something for 88 day is enough? Can I focus on |
||||||
|
becoming impervious to bullets? Any goal is valid? How to proceed, just set a |
||||||
|
goal and that's it? |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
No, it's not. There is a "first week, you take a time out". Suuuuure, I'll |
||||||
|
stop working for a whole week to recover my energies and then I'll focus for 2 |
||||||
|
weeks and take another week out for recharging. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Honestly, I felt like reading some very long ad for snake oil. |
@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ |
|||||||
|
+++ |
||||||
|
title = "Reactive Microservices Architecture - Jonas Bonér" |
||||||
|
date = 2020-02-20 |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
[taxonomies] |
||||||
|
tags = ["books", "reviews", "it", "microservices", "jonas boner"] |
||||||
|
+++ |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
[GoodReads Summary](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29630482-reactive-microservices-architecture): |
||||||
|
Still chugging along with a monolithic enterprise system that’s difficult to |
||||||
|
scale and maintain, and even harder to understand? In this concise report, |
||||||
|
Lightbend CTO Jonas Bonér explains why microservice-based architecture that |
||||||
|
consists of small, independent services is far more flexible than the |
||||||
|
traditional all-in-one systems that continue to dominate today’s enterprise |
||||||
|
landscape. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
<!-- more --> |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
{{ stars(stars=1) }} |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Not actually a "book" per se, but more like a paper -- the author even |
||||||
|
mentions it is a paper. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Now, is it a good paper? Well... Thing is, easy-to-explain concepts, like |
||||||
|
"Sagas", take a long discussion about them, but hard-to-explain, like the CAP |
||||||
|
theorem, make just some short explanations. And this is bad; things that |
||||||
|
really need more explanation do not and are just glossed over; things that you |
||||||
|
can get right out of the bad, do not. Also, some parts put a lot of footnotes |
||||||
|
and assume the reader will read the footnote, which is bad, 'cause if you let |
||||||
|
it to read later, you won't totally grasp what it means. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Also, there is one serious problem: Although it does a good discussion about |
||||||
|
microservices, there is is very little explanation on what the reactive |
||||||
|
microservice differs from normal microservices. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It's more interesting for the footnotes, which have links to the real content, |
||||||
|
than the content of the paper. |
Loading…
Reference in new issue